Friday, February 29, 2008

Doubling down on the gender card

So. On “Nightline” last night, Hillary Clinton said this: “No woman has ever won a presidential primary before I won New Hampshire. This is hard. And I don’t expect any sympathy, I don’t expect any... allowances or special privileges, because I knew what I was getting myself into.

“Every so often I just wish that it were a little more of an even playing field....”

Get it, ladies? This game is rigged against the girl. (Y’all can relate, right?) So vote for Hillary and strike a blow against the “glass ceiling”!

Please. Enough. Yo, Hillary, you’re running against a black guy whose middle name is Hussein. If you want better odds than that, I don’t know what to tell you.

I busted Sen. Clinton on that gender-card shit when she first dealt it eight weeks ago. But, hey, it worked for her then.

The media was all aflutter when Hillary “almost cried” right before the New Hampshire primary. Then, in the debate before Super Tuesday, Clinton said flat-out: “Having the first woman president would be a huge change for America and the world.” And she rocked the female vote once more.

Now, with the stakes never higher, the Clinton campaign has released a TV ad in Texas appealing to women – as women – to vote for the woman. It’s embedded below. It’s called “One of a Million.” It’s deep.

Okay. Most of those women are (let us say) “average-looking.” Half of them are overweight. I’m sure that was calculated. I am sure the Clinton strategists went out of their way not to cast anyone too pretty.

Not to be sexist or lookist about it, but we’re talking about Texas. Where children’s beauty pageants are a religious practice... and cheerleading counts as national service.

To hell with them Texas beauties. The Clinton campaign is like, “Find us a woman who looks like Ruth Buzzi. And one who looks like she’s got Down syndrome.”

And did you notice they got a sister to deliver the subtle putdown of Barack Obama? “I’m not a movement.”

The gender of our president won't make the difference in our country. The quality and the ability of the person will. By saying that she brings change simply because she's a woman, Clinton proves that she doesn't have what it will take. (That's all she can come up with? She's a woman?)

I'm also tired of hearing how historic our having a female president would be. The United States are, in fact, woefully, behind the times. In 2007 there were 13 female heads of state: Ireland, New Zealand, Finland, The Philippines, Latvia, Bangladesh, Mozambique, Germany, Liberia, Chile, Switzerland (appointed, not elected), India and Jamaica. The Philippines currently has it's second female president. Even a Muslim country elected Bhutto - twice and she was running a third time when she was assassinated.

Depending on your political point of view, Margaret Thatcher, the original "Iron Lady," Indira Ghandi and Golda Meir were great leaders, but it was the quality of their leadership, not their gender that made the difference.

Now about that Texas commercial, let me get off my feminist soap box and tell you how I really feel. UBM, you are right. Those were some scary looking women in that commercial. They're enough to turn off the average male voter. Do only downtrodden women vote down there?

Man, I can't wait until these primaries are over so I don't have to hear anymore of her whining. (Yes, I'm assuming/hoping she'll looooooooose). Life is so unfair to Hillary! Poor Hillary!

Gee, I wonder what people would say if Oba kept subtly hinting that the only way to be a good black person was to vote for him.

No, she doesn't want you to vote based on gender. Not Hillary (how many quotes are there of her saying exactly that??)! I'm sure it's just a coincidence that she ran a commercial with 100% women, encouraging women to vote for her. Yep, must be.

I used to defend *some* (not all) of Bill's shenanigans - no more of that. They've proved this year that they *are* politics as usual.

David. Let's be real. Given that the policy differences between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are miniscule, to say the least, aren't you backing Obama because he is black? That is, aren't you acting out of a de facto black nationalist impulse?

^ Not so. When Obama entered the race, I thought he had jumped the gun by eight years.

By the time I started watching the debates, I was unimpressed with Obama, though I was impressed with certain aspects of his campaign -- particularly, the well-produced videos they posted to YouTube.

I contributed some money early on. But I wouldn't call it a black nationalist impulse. Just wanted to see what he could do.

Then he rocked Iowa... and like the rest of the world, I started taking Barack Obama seriously.

And even then, it was my distrust of John Edwards and my fed-upped-ness with the Clinton machine -- not runaway race pride -- that put me into Obama's camp.

And I still have doubts about his readiness... alleviated somewhat in his demonstrated ability to build a competent team, to attract talent. And with the Democratic establishment shifting to his corner, I'm increasingly inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt.

But I am not expecting Obama to cure my cataracts. Or to reverse teen-pregnancy and dropout trends through the magic power of his example.

Could he wind up as weak and lost in the presidency as Jimmy Carter? Maybe.

But I still would take that chance rather than buy in for four more years of Clinton drama. Judging how this chaotic campaign has been right, I'm not wild about how she handles her business.

And if Obama ever let pass from his lips that black people should vote for him because he is black, it would repulse me.

So. On “Nightline” last night, Hillary Clinton said this: “No woman has ever won a presidential primary before I won New Hampshire.

Foolishness #1 - Wrong. Shirley Chisholm won New Jersey when she ran for President in 1972.

Foolishness #2 - That Clinton doesn't know this or doesn't state this in the same sentence that she is trying to invoke some sort of gender consciousness that would appeal to women voters is the whole reason that women of color (black women especially) are having issues with her campaign.

Foolishness #3 - That Clinton doesn't know this or doesn't state this and is still comfortable with invoking some sort of gender consciousness should give pause to the tactics and tools she has used and continues to try to use to try to win the Democratic nomination. This should give all voters (black, white, green, male, female, otherwise) an issue with her campaign.

Obama not lowering himself to get caught in these battles--THE REASON why he is getting the attention and commitment from voters ON THE GROUND that he is.

There is sexism but the reality is that Hillary plays the Gender card for votes every time she can (I’ve seen it personally in 3 debates)…if Obama actually got on TV and said (which he never has) that being the first black president would be a “sea change” and help the hopes and aspirations of blacks and change the way power was distributed in this country, watch his white approval rating drop on a daily basis till he has to drop out.

So yeah there are all types of double standards. In reality white women do far better politically than any black person male or female and that is not mu subjective opinion it is indisputable historical fact.

Sexism is real but compared to racism in this country as far as politics, there is no competition. Hillary should and her supporters should really stop their moaning. This is not just my subjective opinion, do some basic math.

Lets look at some statistics though to tease this out a bit beyond simple opinion.

If you look at the census, America is 12% black and about 66% white. I will say white women are about 33.5% or that or so (women live longer than men).

That means white women are more than 2.75X more populous as any black American males and females combined.

If you look at Governors, Senators, mayors, etc. you will easily find that there are far more than 2.75X white females in these positions than any blacks.

Obama is the first black Senator elected to congress in almost two decades and only the 2nd since Reconstruction (before the successful implementation of Jim Crow).

Currently we have had over 30 white females Senators in Washington.

We have had two black elected governors in America. Deval Patrick in Massachusetts (current) and Douglas Wilders in Virginia back in the early 1990’s.

That’s it.

Compare this to White women governors; we have had over 25 in America’s history. Right now I know we have at least 5. I know Delaware, Kansas, Nevada, Michigan, Washington State. If there was parity there should only be 3.

Until very recently in history (last 20 years) it was almost impossible for a black person to win a statewide political race in this country anywhere, so although I recognize sexism as real, I don’t think it compares to the amount of racism out there and statistically speaking it is far better to be a white woman in America in politics than a black man.

I think Blue State people really don’t understand how hated any Clinton is in Swing and Red States and the problem Hillary has is her husband’s sins, not her gender.

"Compare this to White women governors; we have had over 25 in America’s history. Right now I know we have at least 5. I know Delaware, Kansas, Nevada, Michigan, Washington State. If there was parity there should only be 3."

It's actually eight--almost 20% of the 50 states have elected women to their highest office (and none of them are Nevada, unless Jim Gibbons has some secrets he wants to share with us--given that he's a Republican, that'd be a (partial) shock). Nonethless, the list is:

"Gender," wrote Steinem, "is probably the most restricting force in American life, whether the question is who must be in the kitchen or who could be in the White House. . . . Black men were given the vote a half-century before women of any race were allowed to mark a ballot and generally have ascended to positions of power . . . before any women."

Steinem's lost her effin mind. So black men in the turn of the century deep South could vote? I could bring up lynching, fire hoses, church bombings, etc. but why bother. Anyone who makes an argument like this is not interested in facts.

Hillary's had powerful white guys blocking for her her whole life. First her wealthy dad, and then her husband. As soon as she had to stand on her own two feet, she stumbled.

Has it never occurred to her or her supporters to question this unearned privilege? How about the qualified, experienced white women, like six term Congresswoman Nita Lowey, who had to stand down so Hillary could take the Senate seat?

And if the commercial was composed entirely of beautiful women, the criticism would be that they didn't relect the "real America."

Your comment, "Not to be sexist or lookist about it", rings in my mind the same way as when I read "I'm no racist, but . . . " You can be sure that what follows either of those statements is a refutation of the assertion.

It may be that you reflect the attitude of many male voters: we are turned off by women who do not look like Halle Berry or Jessica Alba (and the less clothes the better). If that is the case, then I think it is more an indictment of male voters tha it is of Hillary Clinton.

Moreover, I think your premise is false -- there are plenty of good-looking women in the video; maybe a greater percentage than you would find among a random selection of women found in any Texas community.

Moreover, I think your premise is false -- there are plenty of good-looking women in the video; maybe a greater percentage than you would find among a random selection of women found in any Texas community.

Thanks for commenting, anonymous.

But if I walked into any shopping mall in America and gathered up the first 20 women I say... they would not look like this mix.

The women in this ad were selected with great care. The question is: Why these?

Thanks Dez for the link to that article. I agree with UBM. It was a good read. Our country is already so divided: red vs. blue state, rich vs. poor, black vs. Latino, etc. Now we've added feminist vs. black/young/whatever. I'm anxious to see how this will play out in the general election.

Admittedly, I will vote for whoever gets the Democratic nomination, but of course, I'm hoping it's Hillary (with Obama as Veep, or at least Richardson). Any chance McCain had for me to switch allegiances evaporated when he held his nose and supported Shrubya even after everything Rove did to besmirch his rep. Blech.